Feedback : all that effort, but what is the effect?

Price, Margaret; Handley, Karen; Millar, Jill; O'Donovan, Berry

doi:10.1080/02602930903541007

Cited by 562 publications

(392 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

331

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…They assert that person-directed feedback (evaluation amounting to reward or punishment) has limited or zero value in the absence of useful information. Second, Price et al (2010) caution that feedback needs to be quite complex if it is to match the multi-dimensional character of assessment and hence risks being not only poorly defined and measured but also poorly understood, or even unrecognised, by students. It is argued by Sadler (2010) and Beaumont et al (2011), for example, that bringing students into the feedback process may alleviate the latter problems.…”

Section: Issues In Feedbackmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, if the impact of the latter depends on the quality of the information provided (Hattie and Timperly, 2007;Price et al, 2010) it may be that important elements can be delivered very quickly. Reducing time spent on verbal feedback and increasing the number of student presentations per tutorial might therefore lead to substantial resource savings without compromising learning outcomes.…”

Section: Comparing Feedback Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Feedback in the module is informed by discussions of self-regulated learning (Butler and Winne, 1995;Cassidy, 2011;Zimmerman and Schunk, 2011), student motivation (Hattie and Timperly, 2007;Hoskins and Newstead, 2009;Price et al 2010) and the use of video (Fukkink et al, 2011;Murphy and Barry, 2015). It is also influenced by concepts of formative assessment both in general (Higgins et al, 2002;Shute, 2008;Scaife and Wellington, 2010) and in self-regulated learning (Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick, 2006;Beaumont et al, 2011;Clark, 2012).…”

Section: Issues In Feedbackmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

What if best practice is too expensive? Feedback on oral presentations and efficient use of resources

Leger

Kenjegalieva

Katsiampa

et al. 2015

Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We evaluate feedback methods for oral presentations used in training nonquantitative research skills (literature review and various associated tasks).Training is provided through a credit-bearing module taught to MSc students of banking, economics and finance in the UK. Monitoring oral presentations and providing 'best practice' feedback is very resource-intensive. Do we withdraw oral presentations from the module, because best feedback practice is prohibitively expensive in a world of limited resources, or choose a second-best alternative? To what extent might the latter compromise intended learning outcomes? We used the same provision of video feedback for all students but used two verbal feedback regimes. For one regime we decreased the amount of verbal feedback and increased the number of presentations. The impact was measured by academic outcome, rating scales and questionnaire. Overall satisfaction with the module was very high for both feedback regimes, and there were no statistically significant differences between regimes, suggesting that less resource-intensive methods need not compromise learning outcomes. It seems unlikely that a single 'best practice' form of feedback could ever be identified, since this would inevitably vary across different learning situations, but there do seem to be some recognised conditions for effective feedback (Gibbs and Simpson, 2004). For non-assessed oral presentations in particular, we start from the premise that effective feedback should involve peer-and tutor-feedback, with opportunities for extensive in-class discussion and self-reflection. It should be face-to-face (one-to-one where appropriate), clearly targeted, engaging for students and student-centred but authoritative where necessary (from highly-experienced tutors).Providing such feedback is very resource-intensive, so we compared learning outcomes for two 'second best' formative feedback regimes of different resourceintensity -video plus summary verbal feedback vs. video plus extended verbal feedback. The summary and extended feedback took about one minute and five minutes respectively. We asked students to evaluate their feedback regimes via a questionnaire, because we were concerned that brief feedback might reduce students' motivation for learning in the context of our module.Our results suggest that learning outcomes need not be compromised by more efficient use of resources and they raise interesting issues about students' perceptions of feedback and how it might be delivered. The paper also adds to the literature on the active learning of skills in oral presentation and literature review.In the remaining sections we outline the essential features of feedback in the module and justify the particular comparison under review. We describe the nature and purpose of the oral presentations, the feedback methods and students' evaluations, and we provide an analysis of outcomes. Issues in FeedbackThe module (Leger and Sirichand, 2015) providing the context for this paper has been designed with reference to theor...

show abstract

Section: Issues In Feedbackmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Comparing Feedback Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Issues In Feedbackmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

What if best practice is too expensive? Feedback on oral presentations and efficient use of resources

Leger

Kenjegalieva

Katsiampa

et al. 2015

Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Researches showed that students most value the feedback which they can use immediately to improve an assessment mark [28]. The online publication of results and feedback and the adaptive release of grades were found to significantly enhance students' engagement [29].…”

Section: A Students' Surveymentioning

confidence: 99%

Improving student engagement in higher education through mobile-based interactive teaching model using socrative

Lim

2017

2017 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-One of the main problem in higher education teaching is low students' levels of engagement leading to poor learning performance. Broad teaching strategies, methods and tools are developed over the years to address this concern. In recent years, with the increasing numbers of students accessing the internet using mobile devices, there has been growing interest in embracing the mobile technology in teaching to improve the student participation in the classroom. This research describes the design and implementation of a mobile-based interactive teaching model with in-class and off-class components aided by Socrative online audience response system to improve students' engagement in a private university in Malaysia. A total of 45 students from undergraduate computing course had participated in this experimental study. The activities such as polls, exercises, quizzes and games was used to stimulate the discussion and encourage two ways communication between instructor and students. Both qualitative and quantitative data comprises of students' feedbacks, academic results, attendance records and instructor's teaching evaluation scores are analyzed. The results show that students were strongly positive with the use of Socrative and felt that they were more engaged. This interactive model has successfully enhanced students' learning experience and improved students' academic performance. The outcome of this study would contributes to current evidence of the efficacy of using mobile technology in higher education teaching.

show abstract

“…At a deeper level, feedforward can also refer to implied functions of feedback (Price et al 2010), such as the developing of slowly learnt literacies and employability skills (Knight and Yorke 2004). When tutors talk about feedforward, however, it appears to be in a much more limited sense which I describe by borrowing a phrase from engineering -"corrective feedforward", meaning very precise instructions which a tutor expects a student to fully implement.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Limitations of Corrective Feedforward: A Call for Resubmission Practices to become Learning-oriented

Carver

2017

JOAW

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As part of well-planned formative assessment, feedback can help students to understand the demands of a summative assessment task, evaluate their current level of performance, and then find ways to close the gap. As students take a more active role in this process, their feedback can be thought of as becoming 'feedforward' since it serves a specific purpose and drives student action. As the value of formative assessment design is becoming emphasised in higher education, summative assessment practices need to be re-evaluated in terms of how well they support learning as opposed to just supporting valid judgements of student performance. However, despite significant discussion of Assessment for Learning and Learning-Oriented Assessment, resubmission practices are largely overlooked even though resubmission can be a key event in whether students are retained.As part of a learning support department's effort to provide effective feedback on academic writing, students referred for support were offered two types of feedback: one was simple correction, the other was in-depth dialogic feedback which followed "feedback for learning" guidance (Askew and Lodge 2000). Student engagement with the two types of feedback was analysed by looking at the changes students made to their work and feedback from their subject tutor (including the resubmission grade). The tutor's feedback was also analysed to see if any intentions for the resubmission task could be inferred.Results suggest that corrective feedback is highly efficient in enabling students to pass resubmissions and that more in-depth feedback is much less efficient. This paper highlights some of the ways in which resubmission practices can unknowingly encourage surface approaches, and suggests some ideas for how learning support can better align with subject tutors to enable resubmission to become more learning-oriented.

show abstract

Feedback : all that effort, but what is the effect?

Cited by 562 publications

References 18 publications

What if best practice is too expensive? Feedback on oral presentations and efficient use of resources

What if best practice is too expensive? Feedback on oral presentations and efficient use of resources

Improving student engagement in higher education through mobile-based interactive teaching model using socrative

Limitations of Corrective Feedforward: A Call for Resubmission Practices to become Learning-oriented

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About